ArticleCancer2010
Generational risks for cancers not related to tobacco, screening, or treatment in the United States.
Article in Cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Geographic trends of tobacco-related cancers in Cyprus.Tobacco induced diseases · 2015Article
- An integrated inspection of the somatic mutations in a lung squamous cell carcinoma using next-generation sequencing.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo assess trends in cancer, the authors evaluated the risk of 1 generation compared with that 25 years earlier (generational risk) for 3 groupings of cancers: those related to tobacco; those that reflect advances in screening or treatment; and a residual category of all other cancers.
methodsIn individuals ages 20 years to 84 years, age-period-cohort models were used to summarize time trends in terms of generational risk and average annual percentage change for US cancer incidence (1975-2004) and mortality (1970-2004) rates associated with these 3 cancer groupings.
resultsAdult white men today developed 16% fewer tobacco-related cancers and had 21% fewer deaths because of those cancers than their fathers' generation, whereas adult white women experienced increases of 28% and 19%, respectively, relative to their mothers. The incidence of commonly screened cancers rose 74% in men and 10% in women, whereas mortality fell 25% in men and 31% in women. For cancers that have not been linked chiefly to tobacco or screening, the incidence was 34% and 23% higher in white men and white women, respectively, than in their parents' generation 25 years earlier. Mortality in this residual category decreased 14% in men and 18% in women. Results among blacks were qualitatively similar to those among whites.
conclusionsDespite declining overall cancer death rates, adults are experiencing increased incidence of cancers that are not associated with tobacco or screening relative to their parents. Future research should examine whether similar patterns are exhibited in other modern nations and should identify population-wide avoidable risks that could account for unexplained increases in these residual cancers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.